Skip to main content
Glama
fr0ster

mcp-abap-adt

by fr0ster
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

RuntimeGetDumpById

Read an ABAP runtime dump by ID or URI to retrieve its runtime error, exception, terminated program, user, time, source position, and parsed details.

Instructions

[runtime] Read an ABAP runtime dump by its dump_id or URI. Answers a summary — runtime error, exception, terminated program, time, user, and the source position where it terminated — and the parsed dump.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
viewNoDump view mode: default payload, summary section, or formatted long text.default
dump_idYesThe dump's id, or its URI as a dumps feed entry carries it.
response_modeNoWhat is returned: "payload" — the parsed dump, "summary" — runtime error, exception, terminated program, time, user and termination position, "both" — summary and payload.both

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv16.0.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / dump_id / description
      Previous value: -"Full runtime dump ID (e.g. from RuntimeListFeeds)."New value: +"The dump's id, or its URI as a dumps feed entry carries it."
    • changedInput schema / properties / response_mode / description
      Previous value: -"Controls what is returned: \"payload\" — full parsed dump data, \"summary\" — compact key facts only (title, exception, program, line, user, date…), \"both\" — summary + full payload."New value: +"What is returned: \"payload\" — the parsed dump, \"summary\" — runtime error, exception, terminated program, time, user and termination position, \"both\" — summary and payload."
  2. Changed2 schema fields changedv6.5.1
    • changedInput schema / properties / dump_id / description
      Previous value: -"Runtime dump ID (for example: 694AB694097211F1929806D06D234D38)."New value: +"Full runtime dump ID (e.g. from RuntimeListFeeds)."
    • addedInput schema / properties / response_mode
      Added value: +{
+  "default": "both",
+  "description": "Controls what is returned: \"payload\" — full parsed dump data, \"summary\" — compact key facts only (title, exception, program, line, user, date…), \"both\" — summary + full payload.",
+  "enum": [
+    "payload",
+    "summary",
+    "both"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. Added

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that both a summary (error, exception, program, time, user, termination position) and a parsed dump are returned, but says nothing about permissions, mutation risk, size limits, or why one might choose summary vs payload.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with the namespace tag and the verb+resource, then a compact clause describing the two return parts. Efficient with no filler, though the em-dash enumeration is a touch dense.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

No output schema exists, so the description's enumeration of returned summary fields is doing real work and adequately signals the response shape. With all three params documented in the schema and no annotations to explain, it is complete enough to call correctly, missing only guidance on view/response_mode trade-offs.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so baselines at 3. The description adds no syntax or format detail for the id/URI beyond what the schema says, and the view/response_mode enums are already fully explained in the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb ('Read') and resource ('ABAP runtime dump') scoped by dump_id or URI, and even enumerates what the summary contains. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from adjacent runtime siblings like RuntimeListFeeds (which likely produces the dump feed), but the purpose is unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

'Read ... by its dump_id or URI' implies the precondition (you must already have an id or feed-entry URI), which is a usable usage cue. However, it never names an alternative tool or states when-not to use it, so guidance remains implicit rather than explicit.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server

Other Tools